Death Row in Colorado: Prejudice, Contradictions and Lies

by: Zappatero

Tue May 21, 2013 at 15:46:34 PM MST

In 2012, at least 682 executions were known to have been carried out worldwide, two more than in 2011. At least 1,722 newly imposed death sentences in 58 countries could be confirmed, compared to 1,923 in 63 countries the year before.

But Amnesty stressed that its figures do not include the thousands of executions that it believes were carried out in China, where details are shrouded in secrecy.

"The regression we saw in some countries this year was disappointing, but it does not reverse the worldwide trend against using the death penalty. In many parts of the world, executions are becoming a thing of the past," said Salil Shetty, Secretary General of Amnesty International.

"Only one in 10 countries in the world carries out executions. Their leaders should ask themselves why they are still applying a cruel and inhumane punishment that the rest of the world is leaving behind."

John Hickenlooper, ever reluctant to do what's right, is being urged to rectify some issues with Colorado's death row inhabitants:

In March, Colorado came close to becoming the 19th state to abolish the death penalty, but the bill failed after Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) voiced opposition and suggested a possible veto. A few months later, Colorado's death penalty is still firmly in place, and the state is poised to complete what would be only the second execution in 45 years (the last was in 1997). Few dispute that Nathan Dunlap committed a horrific crime and murdered several people at a Chuck E. Cheese. But judges, university professors, and other prominent state leaders are urging Gov. Hickenlooper to commute Dunlap's sentence, both because crucial errors that defined his trial may have led him to get a harsher sentence than others, and because killing anyone under the perverted state system would be a miscarriage of justice. According to letters filed with Hickenlooper's office:

• All three people on death row are black men. In a state that is only 4.3% African American, Colorado's death row is 100% African American.
• All three men on death are from the same one county, out of Colorado's 64.
• All three men committed their crime when they were under the age of 21.

Two law professors who studied Colorado's application of the death penalty concluded it was unconstitutional, after finding that prosecutors pursue the death penalty in less than one percent of the cases where it is an option, and that the state failed to set "clear statutory standards for distinguishing between the few who are executed and the many who commit murder."

"It appears that race, geography and youth largely determines who gets the death penalty in Colorado," wrote a group of NAACP leaders in a letter urging Gov. Hickenlooper to grant clemency. They note that not a single black juror served on the panel that sentenced Dunlap to death.

In addition to the injustices that define the Colorado system, a group of former Colorado judges also point out that Dunlap's bipolar disorder and psychotic tendencies were not even mentioned at trial. In fact, according to their letter, Dunlap's lawyer told the jury that there was no explanation for his violence.

Stupidest Republican of the Day: Oklahoma Senator and Climate Change Denier James Inhofe

by: Zappatero

Tue May 21, 2013 at 14:09:47 PM MST

Inhofe, of course, believes his state deserves those resources, even though he voted down aid to Hurricane Sandy victims. On MSNBC, Chris Jansing confronted Inhofe about his calling the Sandy aid bill a "slush fund," and the brazen right-winger insisted the two issues shouldn't be linked.

"Let's look at that, that was totally different," Inhofe told Jansing. "They were getting things-for instance that was supposed to be in New Jersey, they had things in the Virgin Islands, they were fixing roads there, they were putting roofs on houses in Washington D.C., everyone was getting in and exploiting the tragedy taking place. That won't happen in Oklahoma."

Inhofe's answer is too dishonest to fully parse. First of all, there was Sandy damage way beyond New Jersey, including in the Caribbean and Washington D.C. too.

Hurricane Sandy's effects were felt in 24 states and the roof in question was at the Smithsonian Institute, which is in DC.

This ignorant senator is one of the most aggressive deniers of climage change and the massive tornado that just hit his home state will probably change nothing for him:

In a radio interview with Voice of Christian Youth America, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) argued that his belief that global warming is a hoax is biblically inspired. Promoting his book The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future, Inhofe told interviewer Vic Eliason on Wednesday that only God can change the climate, and the idea that manmade pollution could affect the seasons is "arrogance":

   Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that "as long as the earth remains there will be springtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night." My point is, God's still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.

He's not only stupid, but dangerous, and his views are deadly for the citizens he claims to support. Hey, maybe God, by His actions Oklahoma, is telling Oklahomans to stop voting for stupid Republicans like James Inhofe and Tom Coburn to represent them in Washington, DC.

For talk-radio host, IRS troubles lead to Obama not being a "friend of Christianity."

by: Jason Salzman

Tue May 21, 2013 at 08:58:23 AM MST

I offer Crank's comments below, from Saturday's show, to illustrate how the troubles at the IRS give echoers like Crank the perfect springboard to reach for their deepest anti-government rhetoric, while demonizing Obama at the same time in the most extreme and shadowy ways.

Crank: "This is the moment to stand up and say we need to rip the IRS out by its roots! Grab it and throw it away and eliminate it! Get RID of the IRS! Throw it out the window! Let it be-throw it on the ash heap of history! Make it be the Soviet Union! Something that we remember in the disant past! No federal agency should be feared like this - and bureaucrats should never ever have this kind of power. It's sickening! It's absolutely sickening to see this kind of thing."

Caller (Mrs. Youngblood): "The reason I thought why the IRS is attacking most of the religious organizations was that to silence them because he [Obama] is wanting to establish a One World Religion...which would be Muslim. These religious organizations just didn't meet his standards. [he's trying to] Keep them from growing. I know he's Muslim."

Crank:  "...Some people will argue, 'Oh, he's not Muslim.' Whatever, I'll tell you this -- He's no friend of Christianity. When you're attacking churches left and right and their tax status... there's not one mosque that's come forward and said, 'You know what? The IRS is really attacking us' Did you notice that, Mrs. Youngblood?"

Hey Democrats: how's all that Bipartisanship Stuff working out for you?

by: Zappatero

Fri May 17, 2013 at 12:27:11 PM MST

Jim DeMint wanted to break Obama when he was a senator. He couldn't. Then he retired from the senate and is trying to break Obama, and Democrats, and any possibility of passing any legislation, from his chair at The Heritage Foundation.

I must say that's very White of him....

Republicans are on a full-scale, no-holds-barred, frontal assault on the president and are loudly whispering the "I" word: impeachment.

So every capitulation and every attempt at bipartisanship is taken as a sign of weakness by Republicans. Every act of "good faith", trying to be the "adult in the room" and "going more than halfway" was met with contempt and an aggressive pursuit of even more policy perogatives by Republicans.

Dems in DC need to give up on bipartisanship for a while...a least until today's Rabid Republicans can start acting like good citizens that the losers of the last election should.

Stupidest Republican Mouthpiece of the Day: Jon Karl of ABC News punk'd by R's with Benghazi Lies

by: Zappatero

Fri May 17, 2013 at 07:46:34 AM MST

People still like him and support him.

So when Benghazi, Libya, consulate was attacked and several of our foreign service officers killed, Republicans wound up the scandal machine, had some lies placed with a key news reporter, and went to work at what they do best, Lie to the American People:

From a logical standpoint, it was pretty obvious that Republicans were the source of the inaccurate Benghazi talking point emails reported last Friday by ABC News White House correspondent Jon Karl, but when the actual emails surfaced, Karl did not acknowledge who his sources were.

Now, thanks to Major Garrett of CBS News, we have explicit confirmation that Republicans were behind the false leaks. Garrett reports (my emphasis):

Republicans have charged that the State Department under Hillary Clinton was trying to protect itself from criticism. The White House released the real emails late Wednesday. Here's what we found when we compared them to the quotes that had been provided by Republicans.

Darrell Issa, Chair of the House Committee and Criminal Convict, tried to fire up the base over this. Dick Cheney came in and lied that this was one of the worst things he could remember, somehow forgetting he was George Bush's Counterterrorism Czar when 3,000 Americans died on 9/11 in New York.

Then Republicans found a chump reporter whom they could lie to with impunity to try to make Benghazi a bigger scandal.

They lied, they failed, and Jon Karl is the most stupid reporter around because he listened to Republicans....

Krieble now wants work permits given without requiring immigrants to leave America first

by: Jason Salzman

Thu May 16, 2013 at 11:40:01 AM MST

Krieble's plan has been getting renewed attention lately by Republicans (Dick Wadhams helps promote it.), as an alternative to comprehensive immigration reform, which includes a path to citizenship. And so Krieble has been fielding a lot of questions, like this one on May 14 from KNRV's Raaki Garcia:

GARCIA: Helen, my question is, would they need to go out of the country to participate in the Red Card.

HELEN KRIEBLE: It is simply a question of whether a bill can get passed or not. The "law and order" people, who are a very strong part of this debate, say you must go outside of the borders of the country to enter legally according to our laws. And that doesn't mean go home to the Philippines if you're a Phillippino, but go outside. It would only take a week from anywhere in the United States with a forty-eight hour process to do this, so you're out of the shadows in a week. But I think times have changed. And if it's possible to pass a law by letting people get their work permits inside the country, I would love to see that happen.

Garcia should have asked Krieble why her Red-Card-Solution website states that a great march out of the United States is still part of her thinking.  What's up?

Stupidest, Most Cynical and Pettiest Partisan Republican of the Day: Boehner says pay China first

by: Zappatero

Sun May 12, 2013 at 15:10:23 PM MST

They hold themselves in such high regard that the rest of us barely rate a thoughts.

This leads to the kind of cynical and petty partisan garbage that House Speaker John Boehner is becoming infamous for:

John Boehner On Debt Ceiling: Let's Pay China First, Then U.S. Troops

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Tuesday essentially agreed with Democrats' arguments that a Republican bill to prioritize debt payments would put China before U.S. troops -- except he suggested that would be a good thing.

During an interview with Bloomberg TV, Boehner was asked about this week's vote on the Full Faith and Credit Act, which, in the event that the U.S hits its debt ceiling, would direct the treasury secretary to pay only the principal and interest owed to bondholders before making any other payments. Money for other payments, such as those for veterans, Medicare and national security, would have to be divvied up from what remained of the scarce federal funds.

Republican supporters of the bill maintain that the most important thing is that the nation won't default on its credit as as long as those interest payments are made on time.

"Our goal here is to get ourselves on a sustainable path from a fiscal standpoint," Boehner said. "I think doing a debt prioritization bill makes it clear to our bondholders that we're going to meet our obligations."

When show host Peter Cook asked if Boehner's comments mean that, as Democrats have suggested, Republicans are basically choosing to pay China before paying U.S. troops, Boehner didn't disagree.

That's your ideal, responsible, support the troops, economically conservative, modern-day Republican - An Unrepentant Asshole to the end (that's just my stupid blogger self, saying what oh-so-reasonable Op-Editors can't or won't -z), who, in order to pay down our nation's debt, mostly generated under Republican rule, would pay off Chinese bondholders before our Brave and Loyal Troops.

Sen. Michael Bennet lionized by Maureen Dowd/NYT for wanting even more Cuts than the Sequester

by: Zappatero

Sat May 11, 2013 at 09:19:09 AM MST

Oh, wait, Maureen Dowd is irrelevant here in the heartland, but highly influential on the DC Cocktail Cicuit. And Michael Bennet's desire to impose Austerity at all costs caught her attention early this year:

Voting to let the country fall off the cliff was an audacious, even precocious, move by the Democratic golden boy and presidential pet  - one that, oddly, put him on the side of Marco Rubio and Rand Paul rather than Obama and Joe Biden. "It is an interesting group," he deadpanned about the naysayers.

Rubio and Paul didn't have the chance to stake their careers on the Public Option. Bennet said he would, but demurred then, too, and let the Public Option die an unnatural, quiet death.

He also had to go against Majority Leader Harry Reid, who anointed the freshman to be the new leader of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Contrary to the highly successful Patty Murray, and, ummmm voters, who got more Progressives and Women elected last year, Bennet like the comfort of the Old Boys Club-style senate and is strangely trying revive Blue Dog Democrats from their slow-motion extintion.

I'm sure he still wants to banish true progressives, like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Al Franken, from the Democratic Caucus in the senate. At the least he'll be happy to oppose them:

Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, are part of a self-described centrist group of 15 Democrats meeting regularly "seeking to restrain the influence of party liberals in the White House and on Capitol Hill," according to an account in Roll Call (subscription required).

The group has a "shared commitment to pursue moderate, mainstream and fiscally sustainable policies across a range of issues, such as health care reform, the housing crisis, educational reform, and energy policy."

Not many ideas in those areas coming from Bennet lately.

Bennet, the future of his party, comes from the fertile territory of the Mountain West. Asked if his vote was a way to stake out some centrist and independent territory for a future White House run, he demurred, "No, no, no."

I think the Senate is much more amenable to Bennet's goals, especially now the he's following in Max Baucus' footsteps and joined the highly corrupting Finance Committee.

Appointed in 2009 (By Bill Ritter, whom I will NEVER forgive. -z) and little known in his state, he managed to survive the conservative wave that swept out so many Democrats in 2010 and his coalition of Hispanics and women became the model for the Obama campaign in Colorado in 2012. Democrats are counting on Bennet to recruit a new generation of candidates who will broaden the appeal and geographic reach of the party.

I don't have much hope for Bennet and think Triangulation is a dead strategy and the Blue Dogs are a dead caucus.

Unfortunately, this article virtually guarantees Bennet will continue what he's doing, Colorado's citizens be damned. Getting the blessing from Dowd can only be the beginning of stuff like that.

Fast Food Workers of the World Unite!

by: Zappatero

Fri May 10, 2013 at 09:35:25 AM MST

As St. Louis fast food workers were going back to work from their Wednesday evening to Thursday strike, Detroit became the latest city to be hit by this spring's wave of fast food strikes. Organizers report that more than 100 St. Louis workers joined the strike, and Detroit is expected to be bigger; in fact, Josh Eidelson writes, "Organizers say that by day's end, today's strike could be the largest fast food work stoppage yet, topping last month's 400-strong strike in New York."

We won't know the total number of strikers until the end of the day, but the strike is already making itself felt pretty decisively at some restaurants like Jimmy John's, McDonald's, and others.

Who knew my days making tacos and burgers would turn me into a radical sympathist for workers' rights and fair pay?

There are other questions that these hopeful actions have encouraged us to think about:

Do you want the people who serve your meals to be underpaid, with no sick time, and working for below the minimum wage?

Are workers greedy by asking for fair wages?

Are the parent corporations of these giant food chains earning enough profits?

Are the threats by franchise owners to cut hours and prevent workers from getting health insurance a valuable function of the Free Market?

Is having a livable wage when you work 40-hours a week too much to ask of our Corporate Overlords?

And, of couse, Would you like fries with that?

I hope all this Bipartisanship-iness and Super-Duper Triangulation-ism works out for Dems…

by: Zappatero

Thu May 09, 2013 at 16:28:56 PM MST

And all those Gen X-ers who put Obama in office twice may never return to the voting booth after this.

Just sayin'...

UPDATE: Right on cue, that being my acerbic yet perceptively simple blog post, Michael Bennet, Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, steps into the breach to show us some of that Ol' Timey Democrat-type Triangulatin'....thank you, Senator Bennet.

Candidate Obama thought the "Fever" of his Republican Opponents would fade upon his Re-Election

by: Zappatero

Wed May 08, 2013 at 18:49:25 PM MST

   President Obama told supporters that he expected the gridlock to end after the election, when Republicans can stop worrying about voting him out of office.

   "My expectation is that if we can break this fever, that we can invest in clean energy and energy efficiency because that's not a partisan issue," Obama said, speaking to supporters in Minneapolis.

   Obama pointed to deficit reduction, a transportation bill (There's a transportation bill? Ha! - z), and immigration reform as initiatives that could well pass in November.

   "In this election, the Republican Party has moved in a fundamentally different direction. The center of gravity for their party has shifted," Obama said.

   But Obama held out hope of the party moving back towards the center.

   "I believe that If we're successful in this election, when we're successful in this election, that the fever may break, because there's a tradition in the Republican Party of more common sense than that. My hope, my expectation, is that after the election, now that it turns out that the goal of beating Obama doesn't make much sense because I'm not running again, that we can start getting some cooperation again," Obama said.

   Still, Obama was careful not to take the contest for granted - saying it would be a very close race.

   "This is going to be a very close race. It's going to be close because there's a lot of folks out there who are having a tough time," he said.

How wrong he was.

How many political assumptions and decisions have been made based on his belief?

How many of those decisions been held to despite Republicans' unceasing hatred and obstruction?

How much time and energy has been wasted trying to be bipartisan with the most Corrupt, Obstructive, Ignorant, Do-Nothing Congress in history?

American Exceptionalism: U.S has highest First-Day Infant Death Rate in Industrialized World

by: Zappatero

Tue May 07, 2013 at 16:57:27 PM MST

Each year, about one million infants around the world die on the same day they're born. That figure includes about 11,300 U.S. babies - the highest first-day infant mortality rate of any other country in the industrialized world, according to a new report from Save the Children. In fact, the United States' rate of first-day infant death is 50 percent more than all the other industrialized countries in the report combined.

Many babies who die at birth were born too early, and others suffer infections or complications at birth. Many of those infants could be actually be saved with fairly cheap medical interventions, the advocacy group says. The first day of life is the most dangerous day for mothers and babies, but expanding access to several products that cost under $6 each - bag-and-mask devices to help babies breathe, antiseptic to prevent umbilical cord infections, antibiotics to treat infections, and steroids to delay pre-term labor - could help save an estimated one million infants around the world.

Republicans are for Family Values, but sequester budget cuts that they favor will lead directly to higher infant death rates.

Republicans say they are pro-life. They are, at least until the life has started breathing and until it can be sent to war.

Is it really more important that we let Billionaires, Millionaires and America's most successful Corporations keep more of their money sitting in Swiss Bank Accounts and Offshore Tax Havens rather than ensuring the health, vibrant life and education of all our nation's children? I think not.

Does President Obama support any core Democratic Values? Commerce nominee is Anti-Union Bankster

by: Zappatero

Tue May 07, 2013 at 11:26:54 AM MST

Michael Bennet and Mark Udall are still in its thralls.

They should ask Betsy Markey and John Salazar if triangulation is the foolproof method they were sold on.

Barack Obama, similarly to Markey, Salazar, Udall and Bennet, is also taking triangulation way too far.

Against all evidence that says Republicans will oppose any such move, he continues to go more than halfway in an attempt to appease their political hatred by nominating the anti-union, fraudulent-banking Billionaire, Penny Pritzker, to be Secretary of Commerce:

For those who've been waiting for Barack Obama, unfettered from the constraints of re-election, to emerge from his chrysalis and take wing as the true liberal they have always known he was, well, here we are: a proposal to cut Social Security benefits via a cost-of-living adjustments (candidate Obama in 2008 said John McCain suggests "the best answer for the growing pressures on Social Security might be cost-of-living adjustments or raise the retirement age. Let me be clear: I will not do either.") And now this.

In December of 2008, Obama's choice for Secretary of Commerce, Chicago-based business tycoon Penny Pritzker, withdrew her name from consideration in the face of a triple-barreled onslaught. First, there was her position on the board of Superior Bank, which her family bought with the help of $645 million in tax credits for the federal government. In 2001, Superior collapsed after pioneering the bottom-feeding trade in subprime mortgages. In In These Times, David Moberg called it a "mini-Enron scandal"; 1,406 uninsured depositors lost their savings.

Here was what one of the victims had to say: "The Pritzkers are crooks. They don't care anything about people who spent their whole lives trying to save." And here is how Penny responded: "We had seven years of clean audits and then the auditors said, 'Well, maybe we'll change the way we calculate.' " Exquisite humanity, that. The family coughed up $435 million in settlement money in exchange for not having to admit any wrongdoing. But why, Penny was asked, would they pay half a billion dollars to clean up a mess she said was none of their fault? Because, she answered, "My family is not going to litigate with the federal government at a time like this"-a reference to the September 11 attacks; classy.

Obama should stop negotiating with those who are determined to cause him to fail. He should start standing up for some core Democratic principles, support the Middle Class who put him in office for two terms, set a base level of support for critical Democratic policies, and he should do it post haste.

It's not triangulation, but it'll work. I guarantee it.

Why No Agreement on Recklessly Terminating a Pregnancy?

by: Jason Salzman

Tue May 07, 2013 at 08:34:10 AM MST

"Personhood" activists, who've twice lost ballot initiatives in Colorado to define life as beginning at conception, opposed this proposed law, as did GOP legislators, like Sen. Scott Renfroe, who was quoted in the Denver Post as saying the bill should be called "Let's Go on Killing Babies..." and that abortion amounts to the "Holocaust of our day."

Why didn't Personhood USA support the bill, which currently awaits Hick's signature?

"The response is very simple and direct," Personhood USA's Gualberto Garcia Jones told me via email. "Personhood could not support Planned Parenthood's bill because, under it, Brady Surovik at 8 lbs, 2 ounces would not be considered a person."

Brady Surovik was the name chosen for her baby by Heather Surovik, who was hit by a car when eight-months pregnant, resulting in the end of her pregnancy.

It's true, the proposed legislationspecifically does not "confer the status of 'person' on any human embryo, fetus, or unborn child at any state of development prior to live birth."

Still, why not support it anyway? Why wouldn't Garcia Jones back the legislation, giving prosecutors a stronger hand to pursue crimes against pregnant women, even if her fetus would not be considered a victim? Why not fight for legal recognition of zygotes (fertilized eggs) and other early forms of human development in other forums?

Never enough Wars for Bloodthirsty Republicans McCain and Graham

by: Zappatero

Mon May 06, 2013 at 19:11:27 PM MST

Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham are pounding their fists for intervention in Syria after reports of chemical weapons being used. They have called for bombing Syrian air bases, arming the rebels and readying an international force to secure chemical weapons stocks. McCain was quick to say, though, he did not want American boots on the ground because that would be "the worst thing the United States could do right now."

Although McCain and Graham hide under the pretense of humanitarian intervention and securing national interests, they are paving the way for another war in the Middle East.

Bombing Syrian air bases to create a no-fly zone would have little effect on saving civilian lives. The Syrian Air Force has 555 combat capable aircrafts, but they have not been used against civilians. Helicopter gunships have attacked civilians, but an NFZ would have to be far more extensive to protect against them. Unlike regular aircrafts, helicopters can quickly depart, attack, and land necessitating more surveillance and striking capabilities to remove them.

That's just one little nit in their quest to further inflame the Middle East.

Where is Graham and McCain's saber-rattling pal Kelly Ayotte? Oh, she's getting her ass kicked for a little vote against common-sense gun safety that she thought would be a breeze.

With their further aggressive talk and endless desire for war, it might seem that McCain and Graham were on another planet as Hurricanes Iraq and Afghanistan tore their way through our armed forces and nation's budget.

That forgotten history, along with the fact that the this stalemated civil war gives them yet another chance to bach the president (bonus!), shows the purely political nature of McCain and Graham's exhortations to war.

There is not one good reason we should condemn more brave Americans to die because their local Walgreens won't renew the Esteemed Senators' Viagra prescription. Their irrational views show how critical it is that each and every citizien pays attention to politics, and why we should shun any attempt to be bipartisan with any and all of the reactionary and violent leaders of the Far Right.

If only the 2-year-old had an AR-15....

by: Zappatero

Thu May 02, 2013 at 15:47:20 PM MST

On Tuesday, a five-year-old Kentucky boy accidentally shot and killed his two-year-old sister with a gun he'd been given as a birthday present.

The weapon, a small rifle, was manufactured specifically for children's use.

The boy's weapon was a "My First Rifle" .22-caliber gun from Keystone Sporting Arms' youth branch, Crickett. Crickett's website markets itself "especially for youth shooters." The firearms come in several neon colors, and the website even has a "kids corner" featuring pictures of small children with guns.

Because according to the NRA, and the Senators that support them, the answer to guns is more guns. Just like the answer to tax cuts is more tax cuts.....

US Senators ignore their Constituents, get asses kicked by Constituents

by: Zappatero

Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 19:12:36 PM MST

When we polled Alaska in February Lisa Murkowski was one of the most popular Senators in the country with a 54% approval rating and only 33% of voters disapproving of her.

She's seen a precipitous decline in the wake of her background checks vote though.

Her approval is down a net 16 points from that +21 standing to +5 with 46% of voters approving and 41% now disapproving of her. Murkowski has lost most of her appeal to Democrats in the wake of her vote, with her numbers with them going from 59/25 to 44/44. And the vote hasn't increased her credibility with Republican either- she was at 51/38 with them in February and she's at 50/39 now.

Mark Begich is down following his no vote as well. He was at 49/39 in February and now he's at 41/37. His popularity has declined with Democrats (from 76/17 to 59/24) and with independents (from 54/32 to 43/35), and there has been no corresponding improvement with Republicans.

(#TriangulationFail - z)

60% of Alaska voters support background checks to just 35% opposed, including a 62/33 spread with independents. 39% of voters say they're less likely to vote for each of Begich and Murkowski in their next elections based on this vote, while only 22% and 26% say they're more likely to vote for Begich and Murkowski respectively because of this.

You'd think Alaska and Colorado voters were fairly similar in their attitude towards guns, hunting, and safety. Alaska's two senators went with their gut on this issue when they should've looked at the data, which is all around, and talked to their contituents, who are easy to see once you get all the lobbyists out of your face.

Everyone who was paying attention knows what the issue was and had a common sense view on the issue that ignored party ideology and expected their representatives to make that common sense decision.

I dare say the Social Security/Chained CPI issue is the same.

So maybe this social media thing ain't so bad after all, especially if it can force some accountability on those we hire to represent us in that far off universe called Washington, DC.

Columnist can't cite evidence to support assertion that election-day registration favors Dems

by: Jason Salzman

Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 08:19:43 AM MST

Presto? As in presto-change-o?

The "presto" part I get, because the new law would give people the opportunity to register to vote, presto, upon presenting themselves (and proper documents) at a polling center through Election Day. It would also give every voter the chance to, presto, vote with a mail-in ballot as well as the option of, presto, voting in person at vote centers.

But the "change-o" part baffles.

How is same-day registration going to change elections in favor of Democrats? Experts who've studied the topic, even a guy like Curtis Gans who's been associated with right-leaning institutions, agree that same-day registration doesn't favor one party over the other. And they say fraud is not a problem in a place like Colorado.

I couldn't find any evidence that election-day voter registration would make the electoral playing field would go blue--or black with fraud.

So I was excited to hear about the evidence Andrews had to support his column.

"I have not done research on it," he told me.

I was crushed.

But that doesn't stop Andrews from saying: "Same-day registration is going to make the process of voting more emotion-driven and less reliably honest, and that favors Democrats."

"Democrats are a lot better at finding people who sign up on that basis [with same-day registration], and some may be legal voters and some might not be," Andrews said, adding that he doesn't mean to "demonize anyone" because "people have different opinions."

So, I asked Andrews, your view is based on your experience here in Colorado?

Yes, he said, along with his trust in Secretary of State Scott Gessler and former State Sen. Mark Hillman, who share Andrews' "alarm."

If you talk to Andrews repeatedly, as I have over the years, you know that he usually takes a conversation about a slice of public policy, like election-day registration, and broadens it to discussion about human motivations or political philosophy. It's fun, but sometimes it scares you.

In this case, Andrews said he doesn't think Colorado should go to "great lengths to turn everybody out to vote."

"People who demonstrate what economists call 'rational ignorance,' I don't want those people voting," he said.

"I'm a believer that voting should be more deliberative."

Democrats, he said, are more inclined to be "emotional" about a political campaign or "snowed by an ad campaign," while Republicans, he says are more "fact-based."

Thus he believes election-day registration favors Democrats, and my point that there no evidence to support his position didn't seem to bother Andrews at all.

Stupidest Republicans of the Day: Three Way Tie between House R's, Karl Rove, and Louie Gohmert

by: Zappatero

Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 19:59:59 PM MST

First, Rove putting "W" right up there with Lincoln and FDR and Jefferson:

Former President George W. Bush isn't quite a George Washington or an Abraham Lincoln, his former campaign strategist Karl Rove admitted to ABC News on Thursday, but according to Rove, he's not too far off.

"The greats, you can't touch: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, FDR," Rove said in Dallas at the dedication of the George W. Bush Presidential Center. "But yeah, I'd put him up there."

Then the entirety of the House Republicans, still trying to make hay out of Benghazi by blaming Hillary Clinton for  the Hundreds of Millions of dollars they cut each year - $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012 - from State Department security funding. The House Republican report puts the stoopid in John Boehner's lap:

The House Republicans release a scathing report blaming Hillary Clinton for something-something-Benghazi, because something-something-Benghazi is the newest Fox News conspiracy theory and there's really just nothing, and I mean nothing, that the Congress of the United States of America needs to spend their time on more than Fox News conspiracy theories. That's a given.

Darrell Issa exists to investigate those theories.

The entire House Oversight Committee has been turned into an episode of Scooby Doo where Obama or Hillary Clinton are behind literally every bad thing that happens in America, from solar companies going bust to children getting cavities.

The smoking gun in the new Republican report? That Hillary Clinton "signed" memos rejecting stepped-up security at the compound, thus proving that everything was all her fault, period, exclamation point, Ronald Reagan smiley face. There's only one little problem with that: Clinton did not "sign" the letter.

Darrell Issa and the rest of the Crack House Investigative Team of Superheroes got confused on a basic fact of how the State Department works, and not one of them bothered to actually freaking check, just once, with the State Department as to their top-notch theory of things:

[By tradition], every cable from an embassy bears the "signature" of the ambassador - and every cable from Washington bears the "signature" of the secretary of state. The protocol is explained in the State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual.

Maybe Doug Lamborn could've done a quick scan of the manual for his brethren.

And finally, the daft, yet dense, Louie Gohmert, from the Great State of Texas, decided to open his pie hole once again for the entertainment of the masses:

"This administration has so many Muslim Brotherhood members that have influence that they just are making wrong decisions for America."

Louie Gohmert is a moron, and a perfect symbol of today's Republican party: its gaping ignorance, its barely hidden racism, and its complete disdain for common sense. Gohmert is the perfect representative of the absolutely clueless, racist, and monumentally ignorant voters who put him in office.

And these are the people we are supposed to be bipartisan with!